Reopening of assessment cannot rest solely on an audit party's opinion; reassessment under Section 147/148 is impermissible and power of revision shou...
Tested party selection: functional analysis identified the least complex unit as the appropriate tested party, altering the transfer pricing adjustmen...
Parallel tax enforcement on the same subject-matter was held impermissible where the Central Tax Authority had already proceeded against alleged fraudulent availment of input tax credit for the same period. Applying the rule against overlapping coercive action, the Court found the State Tax Authority's provisional attachment of the petitioner's bank accounts unwarranted, arbitrary, and lacking lawful foundation, and quashed the attachment while permitting operation of the accounts. The Court also clarified that independent investigation against suppliers could continue in accordance with law, but it could not justify continued restraint on the petitioner's business or bank accounts.
Parallel tax enforcement on the same subject-matter was held impermissible where the Central Tax Authority had already proceeded against alleged fraudulent availment of input tax credit for the same period. Applying the rule against overlapping coercive action, the Court found the State Tax Authority's provisional attachment of the petitioner's bank accounts unwarranted, arbitrary, and lacking lawful foundation, and quashed the attachment while permitting operation of the accounts. The Court also clarified that independent investigation against suppliers could continue in accordance with law, but it could not justify continued restraint on the petitioner's business or bank accounts.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4816 
Join Channel 
